Court : Patna
..... functioned as record clerk in the despatch section of patna branch no. 1. he was served with charge-sheet dated 31.8.1982 (annexure-1), whereby allegations were levelled against him that he had been pilfering/de-affixing postal stamps from the envelopes meant to be despatched the corporation's office to the addressees. departmental proceeding was conducted under the provisions of life insurance corporation of india (staff) regulations 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'regulations'), framed under the life insurance corporation act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 'central act'). respondent no. 2 participated ..... and the application is permitted to be withdrawn.sd/- s.s. sandhawalia.sd/- b.n. sinha.respondent no. 2 thereafter filed a complaint under the provisions of section 26(2) of the bihar act which has on contest been allowed, the order of dismissal has been set aside, and the service of respondent no. 2 has been restored with full back-wages and consequential benefits. hence this writ petition.3. while assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 'insurance' is covered by entries 43 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J. 1. A Division Bench of two Honble Judges of this Court, presided by Honble the Chief Justice, by order dated 06.08.2013, passed in this letters patent appeal, has referred the matter to this Special Bench consisting of five Honble Judges, doubting the correctness of the Division Bench judgment in the case of Nand Kishore Rai vrs. The State of Bihar and Ors., since reported in 1988 P.L.J.R. 1065 and the Full Bench judgment of three Honble Judges of this Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Sah vrs. The State of Bihar and Ors., since reported in 2000 (4) P.L.J.R. 273, in respect of the issue whether a private Co-operative Society, duly registered under the provisions of the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as `the Co-operative Actfor brevity) not being a œState? by itself, within the meaning ascribed to it under Article 12 of the Constitution, would become a State if the elected Managing Committee thereof is taken over and re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Mungeshwar Sahoo, J. Oral: (1) I have already heard the learned counsel, Mr. Achhaibar Singh on behalf of the petitioner and the learned senior counsel, Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, on behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 6. (2) The petitioner has filed this writ application for setting aside the order dated 04.07.2011 passed in Misc. Case No.6 of 2009 by Permanent Lok Adalat, Kaimur at Bhabhua as contained in Annexure-4 whereby the Permanent Lok Adalat has set aside the compromise award of the Lok Adalat dated 14.09.2006. (3) It appears that Rajnath Singh had filed pre litigation case No.411 of 2006 before the Lok Adalat. All the parties to the said pre litigation case No.411 of 2006 compromised and a compromise application was filed before the Permanent Lok Adalat. The said compromise was accepted by the Permanent Lok Adalat on 14.09.2006 and an award was passed. Thereafter, the petitioner’s father, Rajnath Singh who had filed pre litigation case died in January, 2009. After death of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
(1) Heard the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. (2) This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 04.02.2011 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Buxar in pre-litigation case No.18 of 2011. (3) It appears that a pre-litigation case No.18 of 2011 was filed by the applicant-respondent against the opposite party-respondent in the Permanent Lok Adalat without making the present petitioner a party in the pre-litigation case. The petitioner claimed himself to be the full brother of the applicant and the pre-litigation case was filed for partition of the joint family property. The parties to the pre-litigation case compromised and on the basis of the compromise, the Lok Adalat passed the award. The petitioner filed an application for setting aside the said award on the ground that he was not made party in the pre-litigation case and that the respondent by playing fraud on the Permanent L...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2. Since both these applications arising out of same case pending before the court below and only in the event of the earlier application decided in favour of the opposite party, any adjudication and finding on the point in issue arising in criminal revision shall be required. So, with the consent of the parties both the application are heard together and being disposed of by this court as Composite order.2. Relevant facts of the applications is that opposite party no. 2, an holder of insurance policy issued from Life Insurance Corporation, Gaya Branch, (hereinafter referred as 'Corporation'), obtained loan of Rs. 70,000/- from the corporation for the purpose of construction of house on execution of agreement entered into against his policy in response of sanction of Rs. 75,000/- for the purpose on his application for loan dated...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. Identical dispute is involved in both the writ applications, which have been filed by the same petitioner in respect of two contracts which were awarded to the petitioner. The challenge is to the cancellation of the contract by the respondent Central Public Works Department by identical letters dated 11-1-2008, which is Annexure-16, in the first writ application and Annexure-15, in the second writ application. While cancelling the agreement earnest money of Rs. 48,87,500 and performance guarantee of Rs. 2,52,39,000 in the first case and similar amounts in the second case have been ordered forfeited.2. During pendency of the writ applications fresh advertisements were issued inviting tenders the finalization of which was stayed by interim order of this Court passed on 6-2-2008, Central Public Works Department and its Officials connected with Rashtriya Sam Vikas Yojana (RSVY) have appeared and filed detailed counter-affidavit and rejoinder thereto filed by th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. The petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 4220 of 1999 (Gopaljee Sahay v. The Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.) has preferred this appeal in terms of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, and is aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.9.1999, whereby the action of the respondent authorities in varying the terms and conditions relating to superannuation, and the consequent retirement of the petitioner after completion of 37 years of service or 58 years of age, whichever is earlier, has been upheld. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the writ petition.2. The basic facts for the disposal of the appeal are not in dispute and may be briefly indicated. The petitioner's date of birth is 24.12.1942. He became an Engineering Graduate from the Patna Engineering College in 1961. He had joined the services of the Bihar Government as Engineer Assistant/Technical Assistant in P.W.D. department. In response to advertisement...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
..... section 45 of the indian insurance act, 1938 (hereinafter called the said act) which reads as follows:no policy of life insurance effected before the commencement of this act shall after the expiry of two years from the date of commencement of this act and no policy of life insurance effected after the coming into force of this act shall after the expiry of two years from the date on which it was effected, be called in question by an insurer on the ground that a statement made in the proposal for insurance or in any report of a medical officer, or referee, or friend of the insured ..... insurance policy nos. 10062040 and 10062015 of the year 1960 effected with the life insurance corporation of india on the life of the above sundar mahto.3. the case of the plaintiffs-respondents is that sundar mahto had taken the above policies from the corporation. the ..... also suggests that sundar yadav was of much more than the age given by him in the declarations.43. therefore, in view of the above documentary evidence, particularly the dates of birth of two grand sons ..... tilak prasad yadav of lai bagh, sheikhpura was admitted on 31.7.1956 in class i and her date of birth was 31.3.1951. the ..... section 45 of the act in these cases.12. as regards the second part of section 45 of act, in the case of mothoo lal naik v. l.i.c. of india : air1962sc814 , which was also a case of repudiation, the supreme court held that three conditions are necessary for the application of second part of section 45 of the act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Navaniti Pd. Singh, J.1. Heard.2. The petitioner-Co-operative Society approached by the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, a subsidiary of General Insurance Corporation of India, a Govt. of India undertaking, now wholly owned Govt. of India Company, for subscribing to the Janta Personal Accident Insurance Policy of the Company for its employees. The petitioner-Co-operative was given to understand that on payment of lump sum premium in relation to its disclosed employees, the employees of the petitioner-Co-operative would be covered risk against certain events for a period of ten years. The premium was a one time premium in respect of all the disclosed employees but the policy was to operate for a period of ten years. Petitioner agreed to subscribe to the said policy and paid a lump sum premium for ten years coverage. They were then issued the policy bond and certificate, which contain the conditions of the policy, the relevant part thereof has been annexed by the petitioners as Annex...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Dharnidhar Jha, J. 1. The sole appellant Vivekanand Mishra, a constable in Bihar Police Force, was tried for charges under Sections 302 and 353 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act in Sessions trial No. 32 of 2002/97 of 1994 which arose out of Khizersarai P.S. case No. 32 of 1992 and was found guilty of committing the above noted offences by the Presiding Officer-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya by a judgment and order of conviction dated 24th of May, 2002 and was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the IPC. The learned trial Judge did not pass any separate sentences for the conviction of the appellant under Section 353 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The above judgment and order of conviction as also sentence has been assailed in the present appeal.2. The charges related to an occurrence dated 20th March, 1992. The prosecution story as contained in Ext-2, the fardbayan of P.W.5, constable Ramchandra Chauhan, states that at the abo...
Tag this Judgment!